Passenger Trains > Can Damaged P40/P42 Engines be Repurposed?

Can Damaged P40/P42 Engines be Repurposed?

As I understand, there are many damaged GE locomotives that could be repaired and placed back into service especially for the LDTs.  We know that the abilities of the Beech Grove shops are such that the repair of many damaged engines is quite doable.  If the necessary repairs can be made at a reasonable cost IMHO a plan to repurpose damaged locomotives should be considered.

My question is: could the GE engines that have sustained major front end damage be rebuilt into a "Slug or B Unit without a cab" and then affixed to an operational/rebuilt GE unit having an "undamaged intact cab" serving as the "A Unit"?  If it is possible, Amtrak could repair and return such damaged engines back to the line.  They would possibly save some cash versus buying new locomotives and keep the Beech Grove workforce employed, busy and up on their skills.  The valuable training of apprentice mechanics also comes to mind...grooming newbies to carry on the top skills of the journeymen.

How many units might be repaired in an "A and B Unit" method?

What are your thoughts on such a project?

See no reason that you could not make B units.  But you loose flexiablity in operation.  Enroute road failures is why they operate the two units elephant style..

In the days of 15-18 car trains that needed 3 or 4 units,B worked fine, but so few trains even need two units now, never mind three.

If you're going to rebuild an entire locomotive, the control stand is the least of your problems.

I don't see what the benefit would be. B units are virtually extinct for many reasons. 

Didn't Canadian Pacific board up the Windows etc of some older SD40-2 units and designate them as B units?

Posted from Android

The problem with P40/42 units is that their trucks are no longer available.  It would seem that, with new Chargers in service in several locations, there would no longer be a shortage of P40/42 locos.  BSB

Maybe they will be the next bunch of Cabbages.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe they will be the next bunch of Cabbages.

Or accomodations at Izaac Walton Inn?

Why can't the trucks be swapped out for B32-8 etc trucks?

Posted from Android

These GE's used some type of European design truck. Not common USA North American trucks.

usmc1401 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> These GE's used some type of European design
> truck. Not common USA North American trucks.

Thanks. So, they can't get a replacement from Europe?

Posted from Android

No, the Genesis trucks are long discontinued and Amtrak has to deal with any problems with them by themselves.

And they can't adapt any other trucks to it?

Posted from Android

The newest P42 is 19 years old and the oldest is 28 years old.  Amtrak has really puts the miles on these locomotives and they are tired in more ways than one.  It's time to bring some new "horses" into the stable!

goduckies Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And they can't adapt any other trucks to it?

No. There are no conventional bolster and center pivot as on a regular truck, and were they to be added, it would require complete structural redesign which would involve the whole monocoque body/frame unitized structure. Not going to happen. They will go to scrap, first.

amtrak706 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, the Genesis trucks are long discontinued and
> Amtrak has to deal with any problems with them by
> themselves.

and amtrak people created the truck problem, by not following instructions in the owners manual that was in the glovebox

dan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> amtrak706 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No, the Genesis trucks are long discontinued
> and
> > Amtrak has to deal with any problems with them
> by
> > themselves.
>
> and amtrak people created the truck problem, by
> not following instructions in the owners manual
> that was in the glovebox

Correct. The number of warped trucks due to not following manufacturer service instructions amounts to several dozen of them. The supply of trucks held in reserve was depleted, and P40s had to be cannibalized instead of being rebuilt and upgraded.

Looking at the title of the thread, I figured some wise guy would respond something along the lines of "Sure.  Razor blades."

Mary McPherson
Dongola, IL
Diverging Clear Productions

GenePoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > amtrak706 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > No, the Genesis trucks are long discontinued
> > and
> > > Amtrak has to deal with any problems with
> them
> > by
> > > themselves.
> >
> > and amtrak people created the truck problem, by
> > not following instructions in the owners manual
> > that was in the glovebox
>
> Correct. The number of warped trucks due to not
> following manufacturer service instructions
> amounts to several dozen of them. The supply of
> trucks held in reserve was depleted, and P40s had
> to be cannibalized instead of being rebuilt and
> upgraded.

And what were the results of this engineering study by LTK? https://www.ltk.com/work/amtraks-locomotives
Anyone know? And particularly, how do the results of the study relate to the statements about the warped trucks, and / or the inability to replace the Krupp trucks that are out of production with a different type that can be made and purchased?

I understand how the Krupp trucks were bolsterless. Of itself that's a big hurdle. But the results of the LTK study are still of interest. If they are the same as what's being said here about warpage and inability to replace / substitute due to the bolsterless design, then okay.  Likewise, if its conclusions are different, then that's germane. Just curious as to how the study aligns with the points being made in this thread.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/20 06:35 by ironmtn.

Usually such findings are confidential between involved parties. A member of this board was a civil engineer with LTK but his tenure was prior to the delivery of the first P40 so he would not have been directly involved, though he may know something through professional contacts.

LTK Consulting is a well regarded international firm with deep expertise in rail operations.  It is often brought in as a "second opinion" to assess a company's procedures and practices.  And, they design rail construction projects


https://www.ltk.com/